When I first received this book, I perused the various commentaries by its
various contributors other than Lukacs, without reading Lukacs' own
text. Now I've done just the opposite, reading Lukacs sans the
commentaries (pp. 45-150).
Many of you will recall the trajectory I've been following,
Ralph Dumain:
-clip-
(4) takes on Engels' remarks about Kant, the dialectics of nature, and the
role of the scientific experimenter within the total social process.
^
Would you mind elaborating on this ?
Charles
___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
4. For us and for itself
CB: I use thing-for-us and thing-in-itself
_
When I first received this book, I perused the various commentaries by its
various contributors other than Lukacs, without reading Lukacs' own
text. Now I've done just the opposite, reading Lukacs sans the
Yours is a relatively simple and common error that is easily corrected.
Waistline
CB: No it is not an error.
___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
In light of the many jokes we send to one another for a laugh, this is a
little different: This is not intended to be a joke, it's not funny,
it's intended to get you thinking.
Billy Graham's daughter was interviewed on the Early Show and Jane
Clayson asked her How could God let something like
Waistline2 :
CB: The antagonism between the social nature of production and the private
nature of appropriation or property is what you are trying to get at.
Technical
production as it develops makes itself more and more social. Marx assumes
that
the overall division or socialisation of labor
So why did you forward this ignorant shit to this list?
At 01:11 PM 11/15/2005 -0500, Charles Brown wrote:
In light of the many jokes we send to one another for a laugh, this is a
little different: This is not intended to be a joke, it's not funny,
it's intended to get you thinking.
Ralph Dumain :
So why did you forward this ignorant shit to this list?
^
CB: I'm thinking more working class people I run into have philosophies or
worldviews like this than like the brilliant shit. So, how do Marxist
philosophers make a connection between philosophy and _most_ people's
